It is the use of the phrase "incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States" in Section 4. Since the majority of the debt was incurred under GOP presidents, clearly agents of anti-United States activities, individuals, and organizations, those debts aren't covered by the 14th Amendment. In fact, the 14th Amendment states that such debts "shall be held illegal and void", an exclusion originally inserted to prevent the US government from taking on debt incurred by the Confederate states. Perhaps this is why Obama has resisted invoking the 14th.

3. Shouldn't be a problem. They're becoming less and less shy about showing their racism and contempt

for the Constitution. McConnell recently suggested that we need to change the Constitution because the election process isn't working - meaning that the GOP doesn't have an unchallenged empire yet. Damn that fucking democracy shit - it just gets in their way, prevents them from doing the bidding of their corporate sponsors.

The country isn't what they care about. The country isn't what they support. Yes, it is an insurrection against the USA. They don't work for the citizens of this country. They work for their corporate sponsors, both in and out of the country - it doesn't matter where the money comes from. Turtle-face Mitch has said on a few occasions that the primary objective of the GOP is to make Obama a one-term president. What about creating jobs? What about repairing the damage caused by eight years of the shrub? National security? The environment? No, none of that matters. Oh, and who gives a fuck if the value of the dollar approaches that of a sheet of toilet paper? The GOP certainly doesn't. For some reason, they think they can score political points by trashing the country. Yes, that's an insurrection, and it has been going on since at least the Reagan years.

15. No, I'm more thinking that he doesn't want to invoke it because he feels the same way about the GOP.

It would get rather nasty to call up China, Inc. and tell them we're only going to meet a small portion of our debt service because the majority of it belongs to the rebels known as the GOP. I'd rather have to call Rush Limbaugh and tell him he can't have anymore oxycontin.

Section. 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.

this does not limit to those debts, but makes it inclusive of those particular debts

13. The power lies with the Constitution - not the Congress OR the president.

Frankly, the debt ceiling is illegal to begin with. The House still retains the power to craft spending bills, but failure to meet our debt obligations is not in the hands of any entity - it just isn't a valid option.

Don't believe the propaganda; payments due on US Treasury obligations will be timely made regardless of what happens between now and Aug. 2. We are talking about NEW BORROWING, which is necessary to finance our ongoing wars, among other things.

18. As I mention above, failure to raise the debt ceiling will not, in and of itself, cause a default

Edited on Fri Jul-22-11 11:34 AM by Romulox

While it is true that the government will not have enough money to fund its day-to-day operations in the event of a failure to reach a deal on the debt ceiling, this fact alone is not the same as a "default" on Treasury obligations. Rather, the government will have to make choices about which of its obligations to fulfill, and will have plenty of money to service its debt--just not at the same time as its "obligations" to its employees, government contractors, and military vendors.

Essentially, the debt ceiling "needs" to be raised to fund ongoing wars, one of which is CLEARLY illegal under the same Constitution we are discussing.

19. The damage we face is more symbolic than real. Our reputation as a joke is growing - GOP the fuel.

Think about how the leaders of other countries dealt with the shrub - "you guys CAN'T be serious". How about that in the newspaper in the U.K. - "How Can 58 Million People Be So Dumb?"

John "Weeping Orange Dude" Boner? Eric Cantor? Mitch the turtle? Just to name a few. How about the so-called "presidential contenders" the GOP has given us? And now, owned by the teabaggers, the GOP is just going to say "fuck it" to paying the bills. I'm sure my credit card companies and utility companies would just LOVE to hear that from me! I'm sure they would just say "No problem! You don't have to worry about your bills. Have some more free money and the utilities are gratis this month, oh, and we'll just forget about the past-due amounts."

It is the image of our country they are presenting that is causing the most damage, not the real ramifications from a legal perspective.

but his attitude was let them. However, Obama might feel the Supreme Court would shoot it down so it would be futile. God, I miss Clinton and his willingness, at times, to take the gamble when important issues were at hand.

21. Given the current composition of the USSC, he may be wise in avoiding the challenge.

Their decision could set a precedent that would undermine the very amendment. It would be a risk and probably not one worth taking. The GOP is weak and they'll cave to pressure from their corporate sponsors.

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.